posted October 11, 2000 03:53 PM
Why the LTTE is NOT a terrorist organization
By Ms. Karen Parker
Canadians have asked me to set out my views on whether the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is a "terrorist" organization. I
state categorically that the LTTE is not a "terrorist" organization, but rather
an armed force in a war against the government of Sri Lanka. Characterization of the LTTE
as a "terrorist" organization is politically motivated having no basis in law or
fact. This memorandum provides a brief legal analysis to support my view.
There is a war in Sri Lanka. By war, I mean that there is armed
conflict occurring between two parties. An armed conflict is defined by the use of
military material in an organized fashion by at least two groups organized into military
fighting forces fighting each other. The LTTE are organized as militarily, with a military
commander and military chain of command. The LTTE uses traditional, modern military
weaponry in its combat against the military forces of the government of Sri Lanka. The
LTTE uses a variety of military tactics, including open warfare, raids or guerrilla
warfare. The government armed forces use similar military means against the armed forces
of the LTTE. Most armies in the past 200 years have utilized essentially the same tactics.
The war in Sri Lanka may be characterized as either a civil war or
a war of national liberation in the exercise of the right to self-determination. A civil
war exists if there is armed conflict inside one country between government armed forces
and at least one other force having an identifiable command and having sufficient control
over territory to carry out "sustained" and "concerted" military
action and the practical capability to fulfil humanitarian law obligations. The LTTE has
clearly met this test for more than 10 years.
A war of national liberation exists if armed conflict exists
between the armed forces of a government against the armed forces of a people that has the
right to self-determination. In my view, the war in Sri Lanka is a war of national
liberation because the Tamil people have the right to self-determination. This is because
the Tamil people, the original inhabitants of the north and east of the island of Ceylon,
had their own state complete and separate from the Sinhala prior to colonization by the
British. The Tamil people, primarily Hindu, and secondarily Christian and Muslim, speak
their own language and have their own traditions and customs. The Sinhala people are
primarily Buddhist, and secondarily Christian and their traditions and customs reflect
that heritage.
With the forced unitary rule, first as a result of
colonization and then under the post-colonial Sinhala majority rule, the Tamil people were
increasingly threatened. In the late 1970s, after nearly thirty years of attempted
peaceful resolution to the many points of profound differences, the Tamil people began
forming armed defense forces. At present, Tamil forces are consolidated in the LTTE, which
continues to defend Tamil areas in a war against the Sinhala government's armed forces,
"home guards" and other armed entities.
If the war in Sri Lanka is a civil war, outside states are
required to be neutral - a civil war is by definition an internal affair of a state. This
is known as the duty of neutrality. If the war is a war of national liberation, outside
states are required to support the side with the self-determination claim - The Tamil
side. This is because of the jus cogens nature of the right to
self-determination. This does not mean that another state must provide direct aid to the
Tamil people or the Tamil armed force. However , other states must not engage in any
activity with the Sinhala government that in any way undermines the realization of
self-determination by the Tamil people.
Both parties to the armed conflict on the island of Ceylon violate
the rules of armed conflict or humanitarian law. However, the mere fact that one side of
the other violates humanitarian law norms does not deny either the rights or duties of
combatant forces. Accordingly, the LTTE may not be called a "terrorist"
organization because in the course of armed conflict, some of its soldiers have violated
the rules of armed conflict. In the same light, the government cannot be called a
"terrorist" state because some of its military operations have violated armed
conflict rules. Neither side, of course, can be considered to violate humanitarian law for
carrying out military actions. I have noted "condemnation" of the LTTE
by the government and others for carrying out military operations that are not prohibited
in humanitarian law. For example, the LTTE shot down a number of airplanes and sank a
number of ships of the Sri Lankan forces. These actions were called "terrorist"
by the government of Sri Lanka. These are not violations of humanitarian law and therefore
cannot be characterized as "terrorist".
I do note, however the rampant disregard for humanitarian
rules by the government forces in persistent and repeated military operations against
hospitals, schools, market places, churches and locations with a strong historical and
cultural significance to the Tamil people. I also note the difficulty in establishing the
culpable party(ies) in a number of situations where the LTTE has been accused by the Sri
Lankan government of killing civilians. This is not to say the LTTE have not
resorted to killing of civilians. However, the fact that the government accuses
the LTTE does not mean the LTTE actually carried out the acts in question. The
government's rejection of impartial, international fact-finding makes ascertaining the
truth ever more difficult.
The International Court of Justice decided that all states have an
obligation under Article 1 common to the Geneva Conventions to "ensure respect"
for the Geneva Conventions even when not directly or indirectly involved in a conflict. From
my point of view, this requirement mandates at least that the international community
insist that the government of Sri Lanka to allow both humanitarian relief to all victims
of the conflict and international, impartial fact-finding to take place.
About the Author: Ms. Karen Parker is an attorney
specializing in international law, humanitarian (armed conflict) and human rights law. She
is Chief Delegate at the United Nations for the Humanitarian Law Project/International
Education Development.
Her work involves consultations with governments, international
bodies, opposition groups, non-governmental organizations and attorneys; fact-finding
missions; and representations before national, foreign and international courts and
tribunals.
She has testified before the United Nations on the situation in
Sri Lanka since 1983. Her written statems on Sri Lanka are published by United Nations as
part of the official records. She has also presented papers and made numerous speeches at
universities, community forums and international events on the crisis in Sri Lanka.
Because of her special emphasis on humanitarian (armed conflict)
law, she has works with victims and for compliance with the Geneva Conventions and other
humanitarian norms in Sri Lanka. She also presents legal arguments defending the Tamil
right to self-determination.
Mr. Parker has been invited to US Congress many times to give
special briefings on international law and US policy and has presented testimony on Sri
Lanka at hearings.